SDMF vs. GMAR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

SDMF (Simplify DBi CTA Managed Futures Index ETF) and GMAR (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - SDMF is a Systematic Trend fund tracking the DBi CTA Managed Futures Index, while GMAR is a Options Trading fund actively managed by FT Vest. SDMF is passively managed, while GMAR is actively managed. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SDMF charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for GMAR.

Performance

SDMF vs. GMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Simplify DBi CTA Managed Futures Index ETF (SDMF) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

SDMF

• 1D: -1.31%
• 1M: -1.80%
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GMAR

• 1D: -0.25%
• 1M: -0.06%
• YTD: 7.45%
• 6M: 7.48%
• 1Y: 14.05%
• 3Y*: 11.84%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SDMF vs. GMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
SDMF Simplify DBi CTA Managed Futures Index ETF	0.56%
GMAR FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March	6.69%

Correlation

The correlation between SDMF and GMAR is 0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 19, 2026	0.01

Return for Risk

SDMF vs. GMAR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

SDMF

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

GMAR

GMAR Risk / Return Rank: 97
GMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
GMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
GMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 97
GMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
GMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 98

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

SDMF vs. GMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Simplify DBi CTA Managed Futures Index ETF (SDMF) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	SDMF	GMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	3.59	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	5.93	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.90	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	7.87	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	51.61	—

Drawdowns

SDMF vs. GMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SDMF drawdown since its inception was -6.23%, smaller than the maximum GMAR drawdown of -9.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SDMF and GMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	SDMF	GMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.23%	-9.11%	+2.88%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-1.79%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-9.11%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.72%	-0.61%	-2.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.18%	-0.54%	-1.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.27%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	SDMF	GMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	1.42%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	3.26%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.16%	3.97%	+9.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.16%	6.83%	+6.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.16%	6.83%	+6.33%

SDMF vs. GMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

SDMF has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than GMAR's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

SDMF vs. GMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither SDMF nor GMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SDMF and GMAR in my portfolio?

SDMF and GMAR have a correlation of 0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, SDMF or GMAR?

On fees, SDMF is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, SDMF or GMAR?

SDMF is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for GMAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SDMF or GMAR?

SDMF and GMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between SDMF and GMAR?

SDMF is categorized as Systematic Trend, while GMAR is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: Simplify and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for SDMF and 0.85% for GMAR.